Guns and Politicians: Encouraging News

USA Today reports—and one can reasonably suspect it was most painful for them—the reality of life in contemporary America:

More Americans had their backgrounds checked purchasing guns on Black Friday than any day on record, according to data released by the FBI this week.

The National Instant Criminal Background Check System processed 185,345 requests on Nov. 27, one of the largest retail sales days in the country.

‘This was an approximate 5% increase over the 175,754 received on Black Friday 2014,’ wrote Stephen Fischer, the FBI’s chief of multimedia productions. ‘The previous high for receipts were the 177,170 received on 12/21/2012.

The media, in general, have worked rather hard to avoid reporting this:

Since 1998, FBI data shows that the bureau has processed requests for more than 220 million firearm purchases.

As with all else, Mr. Obama was a leader:

On Saturday, President Obama called for tighter controls of ‘weapons of war’ in the wake of the Planned Parenthood shooting.

‘This is not normal,’ Obama said. ‘We can’t let it become normal. If we truly care about this — if we’re going to offer up our thoughts and prayers again, for God knows how many times, with a truly clean conscience — then we have to do something about the easy accessibility of weapons of war on our streets to people who have no business wielding them. Period. Enough is enough.

“Weapons of war?” Oh dear. I guess I’ll have to return to the local gun store that Browning M2 machinegun, that RPG launcher and rockets, and those hand grenades Mrs. Manor got me for Christmas. I’ll just fly them over in my fully armed Apache attack helicopter.

Barack Obama remains the most effective firearm salesman in history, and despite Americans owning far more firearms than at any time in history, violent crime and accidents involving firearms continue their dramatic decline. It almost makes one wonder if Mr. Obama isn’t being just a bit disingenuous in calling for gun control. Is it possible it’s really about controlling non-Progressives rather than public safety?

Related

Post navigation

9 thoughts on “Guns and Politicians: Encouraging News”

Mike, I think you hit the nail on the head. I agree it is all about controlling non-progressives. In Virginia, our Attorney General Tim Hering announced this week that Virginia would no longer recognize out of state concealed weapons permits, ostensibly because the requirements of other states “do not meet Virginia standards.” That’s a joke. Virginia is one of the easiest states to obtain a CCW permit, which, thankfully, is issued by the county Circuit Court rather than by the Executive Branch.
The only possible justification for Hering’s action is that he is doing this….because he can. He can tear up state reciprocity agreements, which would theoretically make it impossible for non VA residents to carry a weapon as they pass through VA ( I presume Hering is hoping that most people don’t know that VA is an “open carry” state that allows anyone lawfully entitled to possess a firearm to open carry.

In my case, I have LEOSA creds and a qualification card, so I will still be able to carry when I visit my family in Chicago, but most everyone else is out of luck if the other states follow Hering’s lead and stop recognizing VA CCW permits.

When I lived in Virginia, getting my concealed weapon permit was as easy as visiting the local PD, presenting ID, filling out a form, getting fingerprinted, and paying the fee.

Moving to Florida, all the above was required, plus a two-session (four hours total, if I recall) NRA-approved firearms course.

I would say Florida requirements surpassed Virginia in this instance. Of course, Virginia residents will soon no longer have their permits honored in Florida (and a lot of other states — it’s that reciprocity thing), so this action by Mr. Herring also penalizes law-abiding residents from the Old Dominion when they travel outside the commonwealth.

” It almost makes one wonder if Mr. Obama isn’t being just a bit disingenuous in calling for gun control. Is it possible it’s really about controlling non-Progressives rather than public safety?” Not until the last few years would I have done anything but laugh at such a statement. BUT NOW – after seeing what the Gun Grudge Democrats have said a thousand times over (alway with no effect either on the street or politically) one DOES have to wonder if it’s not all about “neutering” their chief opposition block.

I mean: I’ve been wondering for three years now why Obama and the Gun Grudge Democrats showed no sign of being aware of the backlash they are creating when an estimated minimum 120 million American voters OWN GUNS (many in direct response to the Democrats’ gun-hate-speech). I do know that part of the reason for their lack of knowing or caring is a combination of their own gun ignorance and wanting to KEEP the loyalty of existing gun grudge people who’ve always been part of the gun rights picture. I also see they virtually LEAP to publish comments by teachers and professors and doctors – openly using the “image” of those respected (though ignorant) professionals.

So for the first time, I find the idea that the Dems are consciously working on making us NOT COUNT when it comes to opinions in Congress and the state legislatures. We can only guess at the amount of money they’ve invested in getting their message to the public through their ever-faithful media connections – even those unrelated to the gun rights issue, like Detroit’s chief sports writer, Mitch Albom. And lets not leave out their “cultural icons” like popular writer, Stephen King (who admits himself he knows nothing about guns). King wrote a pamphlet “suggesting” the dangers of guns and “suggesting” that more gun control laws are needed (needed, NEEDED).

I wanted to stick to the Christmas spirit for about a week but THIS goes right to my Facebook page.

Ultimately, this is about who wields ultimate political power. The self-imagined Progressive elite actually do dream of the day when American can be disarmed, when only federal police and internal intelligence forces slavishly loyal to them and them alone will be armed. Only then can they impose paradise on Earth on the ungrateful and unwilling masses–for their own good, of course.

I do not believe most progressives think this way. They don’t have to. They can have a great number of other reasons to disarm the law abiding from “guns are icky,” to having an irrational fear of inanimate objects, to irrational hatred of and/or paranoia about gun owners. Some actually believe, ignoring all evidence to the contrary, that disarming the law abiding will dramatically improve public safety. Some particularly delusional Progressives actually think it will lower the crime rate.

Do not, however, doubt for a moment that there are many holding the levers of power that desperately want good Americans disarmed. The founders saw the same kind of people among them, and knew that they would always exist, thus do we have the Second Amendment, which bestows nothing, but reminds all that tyranny is never out of the minds of some, and never far from being enacted.

Of course I agree with what you say. But I truly believe that we are at a point where sifting through the debris of Democrat thought is working against us and that the Democratic Party has to be regarded and fought like the Nazi Party. Hitler took over the Nazi Party and systematically turned it into a murder machine. At that point it didn’t matter that, before, the party had been just one of the anti-establishment parties in Europe and Germany. In effect, Hitler weaponized the Nazi Party and he also succeeded in dis-empowering every other party and citizen.

I want to suggest that it is useful to point out to every gun rights advocate that many of those who vote Democratic do so to use elected Democrats to carry out either their resentment against empowered gun owners or to otherwise use government to impose their will on others. Sociologically, I think the mechanism is clear. It is those who typically are able to disguise their own lack of courage or competence who likely enjoy being “empowered” through their influence on legislators, governors and presidents.

Obama met with Bloomberg to review his holiday announcement about gun control and . . . .
Citizens’ 2nd Amendment rights can be taken by making all no fly list people subject to losing their rights by law, proposed by both party’s Senators and Reps, or by executive order. Then take the data from the firearm purchase background checks and add those people to the no fly list. The background check info is supposed to be deleted after 24 hrs once the retailer is notified. Assist. AG Holder under Bill Clinton was found to illegally retain the information, so was that stopped and does Obama now have it available. I haven’t heard anyone talk about this in the media. Holder wasn’t charged with violating the law, so saying what I outlined above “can’t happen here’ is not so logical.
I imagine the Jews in Germany were less surprised than gun owning Americans would be now if what happen under the Weimar Republic, the registration of all fire arms and then with the Nazis later using the info to go after Jews owning firearms, happen here.
All presidential EOs, laws and regulations are constitutional until court tested; so until overturned, they are in effect. So gun owners could have firearms taken, as was done during Katrina in New Orleans, until the courts could be convinced to intervene. But would Obama yield? Andrew Jackson was told to not begin, what was later known as the Trail of Tears, by the SCOTUS, but it happened anyway and he was NOT impeached.
So why should I or any citizen believe Obama will not violate citizens rights using unconstitutional means?
I wrote Stephen Hayes about this who is with the Weekly Standard and FNC. Seriously, no pundit seems to think outside of the box; you know “it can’t happen here”. Just like President Adam’s Alien and Sedition Acts or Wilson’s Sedition Acts never happened.

As to Holder and similar Obamite criminals, crooks don’t prosecute themselves or their buddies. And as I’ve said for year, when Obama leaves office, he’s going to leave a stack of pardons that will make Bill Clinton’s pardons look like love letters from one third grader to another.